Life on board a British nuclear submarine (2012)

I have always been courteous to coworkers, especially women.

Your comment has just validified my point about today's politics. Decades ago no one would have thought in those terms let alone wrongly accused someone of them.

Just for clarification's sake, when I mentioned I'd be worried about accidentally saying something out of place I wasn't referring to me making sexual innuendos but rather that these days innocent comment is so easily assumed to be offensive or taken the wrong way.

It's why so many of us now simply say nothing, as it's safer to do so. Your hair-trigger assumption again proves my point.

For better or worse, people on these ships are going to have sex (even when it's just men.. don't tell me you've never heard about sailors.)

What about quality of socialisation, and how they fare later in life in terms of relationships

Whether this is true or not, which I doubt except perhaps at the very edges, I am very glad I went to a coeducational school. I ha no female sibling at home so being at school and mixing with girls made me comfortable to be around them.

Monday morning to save face, she accused me of groping her and spread it around the company. I left shortly after that incident, it became untenable to stay on.

Women have reputations to uphold, so will often lie to maintain them, laws are in their favour.

I can't stress enough how everything is different "when one can't 'go home' during off hours". I used to be an enlisted sailor, then an officer. It's sometimes hard to have a few minutes alone in an entire day (night included), especially on smaller or older ships. After a few months any small thing can become a very nasty fight very fast. The word "microagression" suddenly makes a lot of sense. I once got into a fight because some guy thought I had slightly moved his towel that was in front of my bunk. This man had been at sea on the ship for more than 6 month, I had joined mid-tour a month before.

I've seen a male-only boat (there were one or two female officers, which was accepted because of the bathroom configuration) get one female enlisted sailor, a talented and very professional young woman. Everything changed in one day. Though submariners are often a bit more mature than others, managing a mixed crew on a small ship is very different.

Remember the average age on a military ship is rarely above 25. Sexual harassment is not the hardest, since everyone is with everyone 24/7, most cases are very clear cut. I've seen a few very nasty cases (sexual predator that went undetected for months or year, a guy that wasn't reported despite a suspected rape attempt and went on to assault someone on his next ship under my command, a false rape claim) but it's mostly straightforward to handle. A lot of officers don't close their doors when doing personal review or other one-to-one interviews and conversations with female sailors but the paranoia mostly stops there.

Dealing with "regular" harassment, rumours, jealousy etc is way less simple with a mixed crew, regardless of the personal qualities of the people. And of course your management style has to be adapted. When you have more than a few (young) women in a team, you have to lead differently. (Women over 40 are rarely on the "bad" side (when there is a clear one) of those problems).

I've seen quite a few of those cases. Sometimes, we've been successful in stopping them before harm gets done, sometimes someone's life was ruined for months or years or people had to be transferred because trust had been broken too deep and some people couldn't work together anymore. And a few cases with legal proceedings (harassment lawsuit etc), but never handled one myself.

On a personal note I (male) have had to share a two beds room with a female for a few months. We didn't sleep a lot, and often not at the same time, never had any problems. It was a male-only boat with less than five women.

Hope this gives you an impression of what it can be like.

You seem to have missed his point. It isn't whether his comments are considered desirable. He doesn't care, and neither do I. It is whether comments are raised to HR, management, or for personal lawsuits. This is potentially career ending. Part of living in a society with free speech is that we sometimes say things which hurt others people's feelings. We accept this because the alternative is self-imposed segregation. Which is, again, what they are pointing out. In the office today I am very careful never to be alone in a room with a woman. I don't "banter" with women because I am worried that one of my comments, however harmless in intent, will be perceived poorly. This means my dynamic with male colleagues is different because I trust they will not attempt to end my career over a misunderstanding.

True, and I was one of them (and one of the few, but it never bothered me that much even if I didn't partake—as it was the cultural norm).

It's amazing how people read meanings into comment that was never said let alone meant as subtext. That 'teenager' reference I consider offensive because many of the things you presume I must have been saying I likely never thought let alone ever did say out loud.

You clearly aren't of the same generation as me, it's a shame we don't have hidden recordings of those times so you could fully appreciate how truly different they were to the present.

Moreover, even then, the ethos was very different depending on what part of society one was in. Such comment was from my experience more common in the military but it was still pretty much accepted the norm in 'polite' all-male company.

can depth crush rape list be categorised as banter?

I've been reading and watching videos on European cultures. Many say in European cultures small talk is not a thing. I know UK is not Europe in that sense but are geographically. Things like the "German stare" where they don't talk but stare at people. But actually now that I think about it supposedly on UK subways talking is taboo. Someone from the US or Canada would be trying to make small talk in lines/queues for anything.

It's about the sexual tension, the emotions, jealousy, consensual pairing causing drama, etc.

And why is no one asking women if they even want to be in such a spot. I know I'd feel odd if the genders were reversed and it was a very female dominated space that was asking me to be one of the 10% of men quota.

The issues are with both innocent mistakes and of those of which one is not even aware of having made, and of the fact that if accused of sexual harassment or rape and even if found completely innocent—which is seemingly increasingly difficult to do—then some mud will still stick because that's the first thing people will remember whenever one's name is mentioned.

Fortunately, I've never been accused but I'm increasing aware of the possibility—just being male puts one in the risk zone.

More stress means more temptation to take drugs.

You might have to drift quite a bit longer before rescue, however.

likewise deep water is under high pressure, which also lowers the freezing point.

On a sailship where everything is ruled and organized, you can be okay with very little comfort. Of course modern ships are much better in terms of facilities (the privy's not much different sometimes but there are showers, clean bedding, better food - sometimes - etc), but a hammock with a rug in a room with 20 to 100 other people nearby, above and below must have felt pretty much the same.

There were also vast cultural differences between nations. The Royal Navy was known for the iron discipline and punishments partly because it was very easy to recruit sailors. Nations where Navy service was voluntary, or tied to a social corps were probably different.

Today, in an enduring peace context, there is a great focus on living conditions. Though it has gotten better for enlisted men (notably because automation means more space on a ship for bathrooms, larger rooms with less people etc), some regret the living conditions on older ships with more collective life. 50-men rooms were no strange thing on some big ships in the 2000s, I guess there are still ships like that (I've never been on a ship with a crew bigger than 250). Technology (cameras, alarms, fire detectors etc) also means there is less need for watch duty both at sea and in harbour. I've been sometimes among the ones arguing officers care too much for what the enlisted crew says, especially regarding their "generational need" for social media and hourly Internet access. After a week without smartphones nobody complains about Snapchat anymore.

You're right that there is less concern for enlisted crews. I'd say the points of scrutiny are their psychological well-being (they're often new in this, so more vulnerable to depression, bullying, excesses of various kinds etc), and of course identifying potential and convincing the most talented ones to stay and progress. The reasons for this realtive lack of concern can be:

- They're young, more adventurous and adaptable.

- They have it good: the pay is generous, especially for 18-year-olds (sometimes younger) with little to no qualifications. They have a lot of opportunities, being stationed on the other side of the world, going out in strange places and harbours (except for the US Navy, you have to get two truckloads of Marines to guard the place before you can order a drink at an African bar), and get to learn the job as they progress, especially for the technical ones.

- They can leave very quickly if they want. Petty officers, CPOs and offcers are held by longer contracts, that are often very hard to break unilaterally because of legal provisions specific to the military.

- The focus is on the Petty Officers. Petty Officers have qualifications (highschool, vocational school, sometimes college), and you invest a lot in them. They learn very technical, irreplaceable skills, they manage small teams from a very young age, and you want them to stay and progress. It can take up to 20 years to make a combat management system expert, a military SATCOM specialist. You can't get experienced ones on the job market (cruise missile specialists, ship turbine experts, etc) and you're often unable to compete on salary alone (IT and data specialists, nuclear technicians etc). Not to mention you really need them on the ships...

- There are less and less enlisted crews onboard. The ships are getting more technical, meaning the bulk of the crew is made of petty officers. The US Navy counts POs in the enlisted statistics, so I don't have the exact numbers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ehime_Maru_and_USS_Greeneville...

How do you know the next leader of Russia will also be rational? Or the leaders of all other nuclear armed nations that may retaliate against Russia's "rational" actions?

> Also: Suicidal people don't go to lengths to murder former threats to make a point, like he did today with the Wagner Group leadership.

If your days are numbered the consequences don't apply. In that case why not seek vengeance? Killing rivals is basically a hobby for Putin.

I’m more generally concerned that the system we have now doesn’t cover insanity.

That’s not strange, that’s just compromise.

The "clean Wehrmacht" myth has also a history of its own, which I sometimes see as having to do with the political weight of veterans and their immediate families and Germany's progressive acceptance of democracy, in a cold war context.